Not exact matches
, he writes that he trusts his interviews with children because, «Unlike these powerful grown - ups, children have no ideologies to reinforce, no superstructure of
political opinion to promote, no civic
equanimity or image to defend, no personal reputation to secure.»
In Shame of the Nation, he writes that he trusts his interviews with children because, «Unlike these powerful grown - ups, children have no ideologies to reinforce, no superstructure of
political opinion to promote, no civic
equanimity or image to defend, no personal reputation to secure.»
It further occurred to me that family breakdown would be far easier to manage if: people were less devoted to the idea that romantic relationships are permanent and either monogamous diamorous, and approached separation with more
equanimity; monogamous or diamorous relationships were entered into with the same degree of contemplation and intentionality as polyamorous relationships; imbalances of power, knowledge and resources were less tolerated; and, women's formal equality were accompanied by substantive
political, social and economic equality.